Roulette table

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Reaching +500 in 20 spins under a 100-chip-per-bet cap favours bold, high-payout play. Three 16-chip straight-ups reach about 1,528 if any one hits (3/38 per spin), at a cost of 48 chips per spin.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A 16-chip straight-up bet pays 560, which takes me from 952 past the 1,500 target in one hit while keeping the cost per spin low. Repeating this kind of bet over the remaining spins gives roughly a 40% chance of reaching the target.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I need about +564 in 18 spins, so I am taking a high-variance but controlled approach: 100 on a dozen each spin, which reaches the target after a handful of net wins with little risk of ruin.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I bet the smallest stakes that still reach 1500 if either number hits, which stretches the bankroll over the most remaining spins. Long-shot straight-ups give the best chance of reaching the target.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

My bankroll of 1516 is already above the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value. Skipping the remaining spins locks in success.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value and could drop us below it, so skipping is optimal.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

My bankroll of 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value, so skipping protects the result. Skips are neither rewarded nor penalised.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value, so skipping protects success.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

My bankroll of 1516 already exceeds the 1500 target, and every roulette bet has negative expected value, so skipping all remaining spins keeps me at the target.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

My bankroll of 1516 is already above the 1500 target, and success is judged on the final bankroll. Every roulette bet has negative expected value, so skipping the remaining spins locks in the target.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value, so skipping is the best way to protect success.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll is 1516, already above the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expectation and could drop me below it. Skipping all remaining spins locks in success.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll is 1516, already above the 1500 target, and every bet has negative expected value, so skipping all remaining spins keeps the target locked in.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and since the margin earns nothing, skipping preserves success with certainty while any bet only risks dropping below it.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already exceeds the 1500 target, so I am skipping to avoid any negative-expectation risk of dropping below it.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and any bet risks falling below it, so skipping is optimal.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already meets the 1500 target, and any bet has negative expectation and risks falling below it, so I skip.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Bankroll of 1516 already exceeds the 1500 target, so any bet only risks dropping below it; skipping is the optimal way to lock in success.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

At 1516 chips I'm already above the 1500 target with two spins left, so skipping locks in success. Any meaningful bet would only add risk of falling below the target.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

At 1516 I'm already above the 1500 target with one spin left, so skipping locks in success; any meaningful bet would only add risk.